On 11.09.19 г. 11:00 ч., Abdul Haleem wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-09-03 at 13:39 +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>>
>> corresponds to?
>
> btrfs_search_slot+0x8e8/0xb80 maps to fs/btrfs/ctree.c:2751
> write_lock_level = BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL;
That doesn&
502ef239ac5f4b536094
> Author: David Sterba
> Date: Thu May 2 16:53:47 2019 +0200
>
> btrfs: switch extent_buffer write_locks from atomic to int
>
> The write_locks is either 0 or 1 and always updated under the lock,
> so we don't need the atomic
On 26.08.19 г. 18:37 ч., David Sterba wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 03:05:55PM +, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Various notifications of type "BUG kmalloc-4096 () : Redzone
>> overwritten" have been observed recently in various parts of
>> the kernel. After some time, it has been made a rela
s. The first user wins. Either the probe or the patch
> + is rejected when the handler is already in use by the other.
> +
> +
> + + Kprobes in the original function are ignored when the code is redirected
> +to the new implementation.
> +
> +There is a work in progress to add warnings about this situations.
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index 4029c63d8a7d..0e7049688862 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -6590,6 +6590,7 @@ F: kernel/livepatch/
> F: include/linux/livepatch.h
> F: arch/x86/include/asm/livepatch.h
> F: arch/x86/kernel/livepatch.c
> +F: Documentation/livepatch/
> F: Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-livepatch
> F: samples/livepatch/
> L: live-patch...@vger.kernel.org
>
It's a good starting point. Hopefully a bit of tweaking will make it
even more friendly to newcomers of livepatching (I have read the sources
but I'm in no way VERY familiar with it). I'm especially interested in
the relocation and current consistency model documentation.
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
